RAAF Orders 24 Super Hornets?
 

Bit of excitement in the press- will try and find the link. In an about face on the interim fighter policy, reports that government negotiating a 24 aircraft Super Hornet buy.

Makes sense. Shame the F22 wasn't available in those numbers. If you have the biggest mouth in Asia, you need some reasonable air capability.

Defence spending 'a mess'
December 15, 2006

LABOR has labelled Australia's defence acquisition program a mess, as the Government considers spending $2 billion on aircraft as a stop-gap measure while it waits for the new, high-tech joint strike fighter (JSF).

Australia may buy a squadron of 24 F-18F Super Hornet fighter jets as back-up amid growing concerns over delays in the delivery of the JSF.
Fairfax newspapers reported that Defence Minister Brendan Nelson had confirmed that the Government was in discussions with the US government for the purchase of the Super Hornets.

The aircraft are likely to cost about $90 million each.

The move is an apparent about-face for the government, which has repeatedly said there would be no need for a stop-gap to fill the hole between the phase-out of the RAAF's fleet of aging F/A-18 Hornets and F-111s and the introduction of the JSF.

Labor Leader Kevin Rudd said today that while he had not seen the report, the Government's defence acquisition program was "a mess".

"It is full of waste and inefficiency. It's a massive defence budget we have got and it's a budget that has been badly spent on so many projects."
Mr Rudd said Labor would hold the government accountable on waste and mismanagement in defence.

The possible purchase of Super Hornets comes amid fears that countries in the region are buying new Russian aircraft considered far superior to Australia's F/A-18s and F-111s.

Australia's F-111s have been flown for 40 years and are likely to be grounded after 2012, but the first JSF is not due to be delivered to Australia until 2013.

In Washington this week to sign a memorandum of understanding of Australia's commitment to the JSF, Dr Nelson signalled the Government still intended to buy up to 100 JSFs at a total cost of about $16 billion.

But Dr Nelson said he would not leave Australia with a fighter aircraft capability gap.

"We remain 100 per cent committed to the JSF," Dr Nelson told Fairfax.

"But I am not prepared to take the risk of allowing a capability gap to occur."

Plans call for the Super Hornet to be delivered in 2010, though the first planes might arrive in 2008.

The deputy chief of the air force, Air Vice Marshal John Blackburn, all but ruled out the need for a stop-gap jet in October.

"We are confident that, with the program as it is currently progressing, we shouldn't need an interim solution," he said.

"However, as with most things in defence we are looking at contingency plans ... However I don't think there is any likelihood of that having to be before us and we have full confidence of the program delivering the JSF on time," he said.

You reckon there're gonna go to the green machine do you, PAF?

Is this because AJs are training on the Hawk at the moment (according to the other thread)? I thought the Hawk training was just to get them thinking fast enough to operate the advanced technology on the ARH....

Army fast jets??? Would be a world first (I think)....

I think I know the purchase you're talking about but spoke to a few people and no tender process has been heard of or funds appropriated.

Bit harder to sneak in a completely new a/c type than it is with a new gatt or helmet or some such item.

Actually having re-read your post I think you're talking about tac fixed wing transport?? Sounds like TWO more new types for the army, then. In the rumour mill, at least, if not reality.

I have to laugh about KR's comments about defence budget and the mess ...was it not Labour that ordered the collins class sub

The same Labour party that ruthlessly screwed Defence during its years in office:mad:

Army are definitely not going down that line – that is most assuredly RAAF core business.

Army are looking at purchasing more CH47 in the very near future. The only discussion is what model D or F.

Recon and Attack are not mutually exclusive. Army Aviation had all sorts of problems convincing army that it was not getting too big for its boots. This culture is changing and making decisions along Corps lines are no longer the issue it was. RAAF was also opposed to army having the ability to deliver (meaningful) ordinance from the air (as opposed to the Hueys).

No – It’s a capability gap. I assure you army would rather not expand more than already planned at the moment – they are very stretched. If RAAF give away their tactical air lift (re the ‘Bou) can the capability be filled by CH47 alone? How many? Or do army need to go out on their own and purchase a FW tactical lift aircraft?

As to the Super Hornet purchase – sounds like insurance.

Captain Sand Dune....

Just continuing your thread for a moment..

remember in 1975 when Labour changed DFRB into DFRDB after ran off with the entire DFRB Pension Fund, without so much as a 'thank you'.

Cheers, (well almost), FD :mad:

Anyone know why the RAAF cancelled it's Cobra gunship order in the 70's?

They got as far as an A16 designation etc. Was it the inter-service rivalry?

Seemed like a more valid capability to have than much of what the RAAF has maintained for the last 30 years.

But if having an attack helicopter capability, meant losing the Roulettes, RAAF Balloon, RAAF Big Band etc- then I'm glad we put parades ahead of killing people! :\

What's that sound???

yes, it's half the ADF crewrooms across the country saying "told you so!" :ugh:

A16 designator...


Mmmm! Lockheed Hudsons...

A16 was a pre-1961 series ( and you are correct it was allocated to the venerable Hudson ).

The RAAF ordered 12 Cobra gunships in the 70's, designated A16, but cancelled them. Probably due some of the inter-service rivalry you see at play here.

From this week's Flight International. Doesn't seem as though Nelson has the same faith in JSF as the RAAF leadership does





Australia eyes Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet squadron as JSF stopgap
By Graham Warwick

Defence minister confirms interest in F/A-18Fs to replace F-111s F-35 will be too late

Australia has asked the US Navy for price and availability data on 24 Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornets to replace its General Dynamics F-111s from as early as 2010.
The green light for further discussions with the USN was given at the November cabinet national security committee meeting that also approved Australia's participation in the next phase of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme.



Canberra has requested pricing for 24 Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornets from the US Navy

Defence minister Brendan Nelson's office confirms that Australia has asked the USN for data on the purchase or lease of one squadron of two-seat Block 2 Super Hornets, because its JSFs will be delivered from 2014 - too late to replace the F-111s, which are to be retired between 2010 and 2012. Only the F/A-18F is being considered for the stopgap requirement.

The minister's office says Australia is looking for early delivery of aircraft from Boeing's current production line in St Louis, Missouri. This would mean the navy giving up delivery slots, as the US Air Force did to enable expedited delivery of Boeing C-17 transports to Australia.
The office says a decision on whether to proceed with the Super Hornet deal is expected early next year. This could coincide with finalisation of the 2007-8 budget in February.

Nelson signed the JSF production, sustainment and follow-on development memorandum of understanding in Washington DC in mid-December, along with Canada, the Netherlands, Turkey and the UK. Australia has a requirement for 100 new fighters, but it has not been decided whether any Super Hornet acquisition will reduce the number of F-35s purchased. The minister's office says the F/A-18Fs are required to avoid a capability gap, and could eventually be replaced by F-35s if Australia buys the full complement of four squadrons.
The Royal Australian Air Force already operates F-18A/Bs, which are being upgraded, and would be the first international customer for the F/A-18E/F, although Malaysia has been discussing the purchase of Super Hornets for several year.

The USN, meanwhile, is believed to be close to announcing that it needs up to 200 more Super Hornets to fill a fighter shortfall caused by delays to the JSF programme.

Hmmm very interesting.

Pity the F-15E is not being considered.

Guess they will be based out of 6 Sqn HQ???

Training overheads?

Bunch of F-111 guys to convert over?

Any scope for present hornet dudes to roll in.:E

Price has blown out already according to the Murdoch press- now a 3 billion dollar defence stuff up? ;)


$3bn for Super Hornet fighters

By Patrick Walters
December 20, 2006 02:00am
Article from: The Australian

DEFENCE Minister Brendan Nelson intends to ram through a $3 billion purchase of 24 F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft, amid concerns Australia may lack a fully deployable air combat capability early next decade.

Dr Nelson has accelerated plans to buy the upgraded Hornets through a US Defence Department purchase from the US navy.

His swift action came as a surprise to senior defence officials on Russell Hill.

The decision to buy an expensive interim fighter will generate a major rethink of the 2006-16 defence capability plan, with the prospect of a cut in the 100-strong Joint Strike Fighter fleet planned for the RAAF.

Senior defence sources said Dr Nelson wanted to run no risk of an air combat capability gap, with the F-111 strike force due to retire in 2010.

A key concern is that the Joint Strike Fighter, destined to become the RAAF's new frontline combat aircraft, may be subject to congressional budget cuts, leading to production delays.

On current plans, the first JSF squadron will enter operational service in Australia in 2014-15.

Acquiring a full squadron of Super Hornets from 2009-10 will enable the RAAF to retire its 22 operational F-111s in 2010 without the need for a further costly extension of their service life. It would also mean the air force could reduce to 42 the number of aircraft taking part in the full $1.5 billion Hornet upgrade program.

A decision on an interim fighter solution was expected early in 2007, but Dr Nelson chose to go public with the Super Hornet plan during his visit to the US last week.

The F/A-18F has been in service with the US navy since 1998 and has recently seen service in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Dr Nelson decided to opt for the Super Hornet without a detailed study of alternative aircraft types such as the US air force's F-15 Eagle or the European Typhoon. The Super Hornet offers some commonalities with the Australian air force's existing Hornet fleet and a relatively easy conversion for air crew, air force sources say.

Andrew Davies of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute said the planned purchase raised serious cost and capability issues. "Its another fourth-generation aircraft. It's not the quantum lift that JSF gives you," Dr Davies said.

"Either something will have to give way in the defence capability plan, or the Government will have to supplement the defence budget."

Jet engines are more reliable these days. And I imagine knuckleheads are more precious than ever, and like to drop their bombs from the flight levels, negating the insurance policy of a second engine over a battlefield.

24 Phantoms, 24 F111's & now 24 Super Hornets. 24 is a magic number for the RAAF. Why were 24 F22's never seriously debated as an F111 replacement? 24 F22's & 48 JSF's would make for the most capable air force in the region for the next 30 years!

Although the F111 & F22 are poles apart in roles & capability. In terms of raw deterrence in Asia, the F22 is the aircraft that would do what the F111's did in the 70's & 80's. No Asian air force would every want to have a skirmish with an F22 equiped RAAF. F111's destroyed air forces on the ground, F22 can do it in the air -aswell as having enough strike capability( coupled with upgraded F18's ) to see the RAAF through until JSF available.

The drawbacks of the F22 for the RAAF - the one billion US dollars Australia would have to spend to make the aircraft suitable for export.

And secondly, the F22 too capable for any potential regional adversary to structure itself around- for example, Indonesia would probably move toward asymmetric capabilites, to negate any future air campaign Australia could wage against it's interests ( much the way Iran & Syria invested in Hezbollah in countering Israel's air dominance ).

Perhaps, Defence planners see merit in, granting Indonesia some delusional 'face', in investing vast amounts of money in unarmed and hard to maintain Russian fighters, as opposed to an army structure airpower could not negate.

Well, how common are the different Hornet versions? Is it that much to preclude the F15E?

As for training/conversion, if the F111 crews are to be used, does it really matter the aircraft type? It'll be new to them either way. If they convert current Hornet crews, well the F111 chaps will still need to learn the old Hornet....

:confused:

Buster

The Americans are still making the Super Hornet for themselves in large numbers. The F15E line is probably just idling along for the Singaporians & Koreans. It is probably too late and too expensive to order the F15E.

This sounds as though Nelson is panicked by what could develop and has overrided the RAAF Brass. Who only a few months ago, denied a requirment for an interim jet. The Super Hornet is probably available very soon. If a C17 like deal can be struck.

Some press reports the aircraft going to Tindal & Amberley. It won't be like the F4E arrangement. Where the aircraft was used in a limited capacity as a bomber until the F111 arrived.The Super Hornet is to bridge the startling obvious capability gap between F111 retirement and F35 IOC.

A fair old cock up. But well done to goverment for not being blinded by JSF pie in the sky.

They found a billion dollars to give away, pretty easily after the tsunami a couple of years ago.

What are you talking about, can't make sense of it with your weird grammar and punctuation. Sorry.... :rolleyes:

Listen ScoobyDoo. I like long sentences-so go easy on the grammar.....


The point I was making regarding Indonesia, is if they continue to focus a considerable amount of their defence budget on capital equipment that they can not arm, operate or maintain. This is a passive victory for defence planners in Australia.

If Australia was equipped with the F22, the Indonesian Air Force is virtually doomed to eternal obsolescence. With a view to their budget and access to technology.

A RAAF with the F22, and say later the F35, becomes the undisputable dominant air force of the region. Indonesia will probably learn the lessons of Hezbollah, in countering and exploiting the limitations of airpower. An airpower savvy, mobile and well equipped Indonesian army, would not be in our best interests- nor would a few other unnamed countries in the region.

Drawing a long bow? Well we are a country who deliberately didn't operate tankers with F111. And avoided at all costs, the introduction of cruise missiles in the region. I don't think we ever worried about offending the Indon's by not introducing these capabilites. More a policy of not having them structure their defences in countering their vulnerability to airpower.

So, just a thought. F22 has been avoided not because of it's prohibitive price, but because it could create a paradox. Forcing potential regional adversaries to concede their vulnerability to airpower, and restructure and address it.

While Indonesia spends billions on unarmed Flankers, or submarines that are used for cocktail parties, or surveillance aircraft used for moving loot for generals around the archipelago, there is little to worry about.

However, if the Indonesians concede the loss of face in the air, and invest in asymmetric capabilities, this is much more difficult a prospect for defence planning.